From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!newsfeed.xs3.de!io.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada wikibook help needed (O-O)
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 17:03:18 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <odlsn7$vd6$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: <odhv2v$9vi$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rrsoftware.com
X-Trace: franka.jacob-sparre.dk 1493071399 32166 24.196.82.226 (24 Apr 2017
 22:03:19 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 22:03:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:46621
Date: 2017-04-24T17:03:18-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"G.B." <bauhaus@notmyhomepage.invalid> wrote in message 
news:odhv2v$9vi$1@dont-email.me...
...
>   "A conversion to the class-wide type makes [components] visible again."
>
> Is "visible" correct?

I believe so (without actually reading the entire section). The components 
always exist, after all, but you can't reference them. Visibility is the way 
that's described in Ada, at least for the most part.

> Is it correct to say "static call" at all, other than when waving hands,
> (not helpfully IMHO) in
>
>   "within Op1, the first call to Op2 is therefore also a static call "

No. A "static call" is defined in 4.9. The author meant "statically tagged 
call" as described in 3.9.2 (3-6/2, 14-19), or even more formally, a "call 
with a statically determined controlling tag value". Usually, that's 
informally described as a "statically bound call".

>    "In other OO languages, a method is either dispatching or not.
>     In Ada, a routine is either _available_ for dispatching or not. "

I think this is fine; an operation is either a dispatching operation or it 
isn't. (See 3.9.2(1/2)). If it isn't, then it never dispatches; otherwise, 
whether it dispatches depends on whether the call is statically or 
dynamically bound.

                             Randy.